D&D 5E Arguing, ideating and solution-seeking on the D&D Enworld forum

[Hussar]

Don't people care if awareness of the issue doesn't translate to actual changes in their game?

It sounded to me like there is/was a strong sense of urgency in adopting changes to evil humanoid races. "Just stop doing it" kind of thing.

But, what urgency is there? It's already done. All we're waiting for now is for the books to drop. This matter is, as far as WotC is concerned, already resolved.

What results are you looking for? They are changing orcs. They are changing drow. It's never, ever been about what someone does in their home game. That's entirely up to them and between them and their group.

We can't make WotC publish books faster - they will publish when they publish. And, given what we've seen in the Monster's book (the new one that's being bandied about right now whose name I totally forget) and what WotC has already said, the debate, such as it is, is over. They are going to make these changes.

So, I'm not really sure what more you are expecting.

 

[payn]

IMO, this is very untrue. But it really depends on the kind of people you discuss and argue with and how open you are to having your own mind changed. IMO your own openess to having your mind changed is a great predictor of whether you can change someone elses mind.

I will say this though, changing someones mind isn't instantaneous or easy. It's a process. First you have to present some strong points - and not the grandstanding kind. Then you have to be patient as they evaluate those strong points in comparison to their overall philosphical frameworks and beliefs - potentially requiring their framework or beliefs to be updated in response to the new ideas. This often requires additional conversations either with you or others about tangentially related issues before the new idea is fully accepted. And oftentimes it's a process we don't get to see the end result of.

If folks are at least open to Rogerian argument, you will see some movement in positions. At the very least, folks tend to be more respectful.

One of the most useful things I learned in negotiation is to talk about interests instead of positions. We are in a high tide of position based culture right now.

 

[DarkMantle]

But, what urgency is there? It's already done. All we're waiting for now is for the books to drop. This matter is, as far as WotC is concerned, already resolved.

What results are you looking for? They are changing orcs. They are changing drow. It's never, ever been about what someone does in their home game. That's entirely up to them and between them and their group.

We can't make WotC publish books faster - they will publish when they publish. And, given what we've seen in the Monster's book (the new one that's being bandied about right now whose name I totally forget) and what WotC has already said, the debate, such as it is, is over. They are going to make these changes.

So, I'm not really sure what more you are expecting.

Regarding the "never, ever been about what someone does in their home game", so I didn't know for sure or it wasn't 100% clear to me. It certainly didn't feel like it. I have read posts (one specific one in mind right now) that could easily be interpreted as denouncements of what people think/do in their private imagination. I mean, do you know 100% for sure that are you able to speak on mostly everyone else's behalf? Anyway, it could be a lot clearer if people are referencing WoTC, hypothetical games, their games or somebody else's game.

For the "I'm not really sure what more you are expecting", that's a good question, and I look at it this way (and the "you" below is generic you, not specific you):

1. Take a contentious issue, like the edition wars, where people argued ad nauseum. Then, strip out the context for a moment and double-down on people's motivations/end goal

2. Now let's say you dislike the current edition, and there is NO new edition on the horizon. If your end goal is to effect change, then for example, it is rational (albeit inefficient) to argue ad nauseum about how much you dislike the current edition, not particularly to change the minds of any Enworlder, but with the vague hope that WoTC designers might be listening and do something about it.

3. Now let's say you dislike the current edition, BUT everyone knows there is a new upcoming edition. If you are the same example person in point #2, it is no longer rational to argue ad nauseum about how much you dislike the current edition, because the new edition is coming out anyway. Because it's not like you need the validation of other Enworlders that this new edition is coming, because you know it is. Unless you had some other new goal now (such as influencing what rules will be/not be in the new edition)

Of course, the above presumes people are rational and it also presumes that arguing for fun can't be an end goal to itself, and that presumption does not hold water for anyone in any situation where that's not true.

But for me, I guess I somehow interpreted all the arguing as people really wanting to effect or resist change. Or be a "justice warrior" and change someone's heart and mind. Whatever the reason, it felt like it was important and urgent.

Also some people were hurting. If people are really hurting, I mean, that could be a reason in itself for urgency. (On the other hand, if you are correct that it was never really about what people do in their own private games, then who is hurting whom and when?)

Anyway, looping back to my prior point, racism and inequality is serious, and people have literally died for it. So if there is no rational end goal, it seems like the act of arguing incessantly is somehow trivializing racism at some level that just feels wrong to me. I'm not sure yet how else to articulate that part to myself (or to another person)

 

[Hussar]

Well, actually, @DarkMantle, I do want to thank you for helping me reach a bit of an epiphany.

The conversation around racism and whatnot in the game is largely over. It's done. We know that WotC is making changes. WotC has already made many changes and is commited to doing more. So, really, job done. Now it's time to watch and make sure that things are moving along, but, really, all the sound and thunder over things like orcs and whatnot is just people digging in their heels.

I mean, look at it like this. Some years ago, the art of D&D was criticised for using cheesecake. And, now, we don't see cheesecake art in WotC publications. Then D&D was criticised for inclusiveness. And things got changed. You see all sorts of changes in the art and presentation in the game. Paizo very rightly deserves a lot of credit for what it's done as well.

Then it was LGBTQ+ issues. Well, elves, one of the most popular races in the game outside of humans, are now all gender fluid whose main deity is a non-binary gender fluid individual. Again, job largely done.

It was pointed out that many of the older publications are ... perhaps less than sensitive. So, now there's a honking big disclaimer there.

So, now it's basically just mopping up the small stuff. The orc stuff and the drow stuff and various other bits and bobs, in the grand scheme of things probably aren't terribly earth shattering issues, despite the rhetoric around them.

Like I said, what, exactly, are you expecting to happen here? The race is largely done and those voices who opposed change by and large lost. The change is happening regardless of how many "Was this really racist" type threads we see. It's healthy to keep talking about it, but, it's healthier to realize that there really isn't a whole lot that needs to be done.

 

[CleverNickName]

@Hussar makes a good point, but I think they use the word "done" too much. None of the work is done, as in complete, but it is moving in the right direction, and that's great.

Now is the time for vigilance. The ball is moving, and that's excellent, but we're a long way from the end zone. For example, the Legacy Content Disclaimer was nice, but the goal was never to get a content warning. The goal was to increase the understanding of racially sensitive issues and change the way certain cultures are being represented in our hobby. That work has certainly started, and grown in recent years, but I wouldn't say that it's done. These arguments alone are evidence that we need to work on our Understanding of others.

Anyway. Good points, Hussar. But I don't think the "job is largely done" on any of those points.

What else is there to do? I'm not quite sure. We could keep the conversation going, keep bringing in more people of varied cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds and asking their point of view, keep looking for new directions to grow...I know it's not an instant fix, but I think it's a good way to keep the ball moving.

 

[Scott Christian]

I find everyone on here to be insightful. We may not always agree, but in the end, the difference seems reasonable to me.

When there is a really heated debate, I find the fault generally lies with someone not actually stating their claim clearly. It's masked in semantics and analogies, and therefore, easily misunderstood.

 

[DarkMantle]

Well, actually, @DarkMantle, I do want to thank you for helping me reach a bit of an epiphany.

Then you are most welcome!

Like I said, what, exactly, are you expecting to happen here? <snip> It's healthy to keep talking about it, but, it's healthier to realize that there really isn't a whole lot that needs to be done.

What am I expecting...
Learn a bunch of stuff I didn't understand?
Have a semi-productive discussion about it?
Make a "scientific" poll to gather data nobody had before?
Try to wrap my head around it all?

Guess I'm "done". Can walk off into the sunset and all that.

 

[Hussar]

@Hussar makes a good point, but I think they use the word "done" too much. None of the work is done, as in complete, but it is moving in the right direction, and that's great.

Now is the time for vigilance. The ball is moving, and that's excellent, but we're a long way from the end zone. For example, the Legacy Content Disclaimer was nice, but the goal was never to get a content warning. The goal was to increase the understanding of racially sensitive issues and change the way certain cultures are being represented in our hobby. That work has certainly started, and grown in recent years, but I wouldn't say that it's done. These arguments alone are evidence that we need to work on our Understanding of others.

Anyway. Good points, Hussar. But I don't think the "job is largely done" on any of those points.

What else is there to do? I'm not quite sure. We could keep the conversation going, keep bringing in more people of varied cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds and asking their point of view, keep looking for new directions to grow...I know it's not an instant fix, but I think it's a good way to keep the ball moving.

Sorry, yes, you are absolutely right here. And, yes, I meant done as in "moving in the right direction". As in, we've got the ball rolling and, other than making sure it keeps rolling and hopefully smoothing some bumps along the way (wow, now how's that for abusing a metaphor?)

But, yeah, totally agreeing here. Engagement is obviously the way forward.

 

[jmartkdr2]

@Hussar makes a good point, but I think they use the word "done" too much. None of the work is done, as in complete, but it is moving in the right direction, and that's great.

I think he meant done as in "the conversation about whether to do this is over." The decision has been made.

But as you note: there's still more to do.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

The amount of bad faith right-fighting is more than a decade ago, probably taints my opinion on the arguing category. Just too much.